Madhya Pradesh High Court
Banti @ Mithun vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 May, 2024
Author: Prakash Chandra Gupta
Bench: Prakash Chandra Gupta
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA
ON THE 14 th OF MAY, 2024
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 4384 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
MITHUN DODAWE S/O MANGAL SINGH DODAWE,
AGED 29 YEARS, OCCUPATION: DRIVER R/O GRAM
MAWDIPURA DISTT. INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI VISHAL SHARMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION TEJAJI NAGAR, DISTRICT
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. VICTIM X THROUGH P.S. TEJAJI NAGAR
DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI CHANDRA PRAKASH PUROHIT - COMPLAINANT AND MS.
BHAGYASHREE GUPTA - GOVT. ADVOCATE)
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 3986 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
BANTI @ MITHUN S/O HARIGIRI GOSWAMI, AGED 29
YEAR S , OCCUPATION: LABORER R/O AAGROD, PS
TONKKHURD DISTT. DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI VISHAL SHARMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION TEJAJI NAGAR, DISTRICT
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
Signing time: 15-05-
2024 11:19:59
2
2. VICTIM X THROUGH P.S. TEJAJI NAGAR DIST.
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI CHANDRA PRAKASH PUROHIT - COMPLAINANT AND MS.
BHAGYASHREE GUPTA - GOVT. ADVOCATE)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Heard with the aid of case diary.
Both are criminal appeals filed under Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "SC/ST Act") against the orders dated 22.03.2024 and 22.12.2023 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Indore, whereby the applications filed by the appellants under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been dismissed in connection with FIR/Crime No.336/2023 dated (not mentioned) registered at Police Station - Tejaji Nagar, District - Indore for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the IPC alongwith Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
2. Earlier, criminal appeal of appellant Mithun Dodawe was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 05.02.2024 passed in Cr.A. No.433/2024 and criminal appeal of appellant Banti @ Mithun was dismissed on merits vide order dated 14.03.2023 passed in Cr.A. No.14846/2023.
3 . Prosecution story, in brief is that at the time of the incident, the prosecutrix was aged around 16 years and 08 months. She belongs to Scheduled Castes community. There was friendship between the prosecutrix and co-accused Payal. On 31.05.2023, Payal took the prosecutrix alongwith her with the consent of her father to visit different places and told him that they will Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 15-05- 2024 11:19:59 3 return by evening. Thereafter, co-accused persons Payal, her mother Rekha Solanki, her brother and appellant Mithun Dodawe, appellant Banti @ Mithun and others in furtherance of their common intention got the prosecutrix married to Kamlesh in exchange for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-. The accused persons got the marriage notarized by forging affidavit by making fake signatures using counterfeited notary seal and changing the name of the prosecutrix. Thereafter, the accused persons left the prosecutrix with Kamlesh and other accused persons had left from there. The police had recovered the prosecutrix on 16.07.2023 from Banbana Phata, Nagda, District Ujjain.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants/accused persons submit that the appellants have not committed the offence and they have falsely been implicated in the case. The prosecutrix went missing on 31.05.2023 but the missing report was lodged by father of prosecutrix belatedly on 23.06.2023, without any plausible explanation. An FIR was lodged against unknown persons. Therefore, it is prayed that the appellants be released on bail.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant pleaded that he has no objection if the appellants are granted bail.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer and submits that the prosecutrix is minor (below 17 years o f age). After she went missing, her parents were indulged to search her, because of which the missing person report was lodged belatedly. The FIR was lodged by father of the prosecutrix on 23.06.2023 against unknown persons. But, when the prosecutrix was recovered, her statement was recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., wherein, it is clear that the appellants and co- accused persons committed the offence.
7. It is further submitted that Cr.As. No.15147/2023, 13407/2023 and Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 15-05- 2024 11:19:59 4 14846/2023 of the appellants/accused persons namely Kamlesh, Smt. Rekha and Banti @ Mithun have been dismissed on merits. There is no change in circumstances. Case of the appellant Banti @ Mithun is identical with the aforesaid co-accused persons, therefore appellants are not entitled for bail.
9. Having considered the rival submissions and after perusal of the case- diary so also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, at this stage, this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to grant bail to the appellants. Resultantly, impugned orders dated 22.03.2024 and 22.12.2023 are affirmed and the present appeals are hereby dismissed.
(PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA) JUDGE Shruti Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 15-05- 2024 11:19:59